Man Can't Let Friends With RV Stay on 86 Acre Farm
Posted by Zenphamy 10 years, 10 months ago to Government
So what do property rights mean now?
- Hot
- New
- Categories...
- Producer's Lounge
- Producer's Vault
- The Gulch: Live! (New)
- Ask the Gulch!
- Going Galt
- Books
- Business
- Classifieds
- Culture
- Economics
- Education
- Entertainment
- Government
- History
- Humor
- Legislation
- Movies
- News
- Philosophy
- Pics
- Politics
- Science
- Technology
- Video
- The Gulch: Best of
- The Gulch: Bugs
- The Gulch: Feature Requests
- The Gulch: Featured Producers
- The Gulch: General
- The Gulch: Introductions
- The Gulch: Local
- The Gulch: Promotions
- Marketplace
- Members
- Store
- More...
"Today the Court abandons this long-held, basic limitation on government power. Under the banner of economic development, all private property is now vulnerable to being taken and transferred to another private owner, so long as it might be upgraded--i.e., given to an owner who will use it in a way that the legislature deems more beneficial to the public--in the process. To reason, as the Court does, that the incidental public benefits resulting from the subsequent ordinary use of private property render economic development takings "for public use" is to wash out any distinction between private and public use of property--and thereby effectively to delete the words "for public use" from the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment. Accordingly I respectfully dissent."
and
"Any property may now be taken for the benefit of another private party, but the fallout from this decision will not be random. The beneficiaries are likely to be those citizens with disproportionate influence and power in the political process, including large corporations and development firms. As for the victims, the government now has license to transfer property from those with fewer resources to those with more. The Founders cannot have intended this perverse result. "[T]hat alone is a just government," wrote James Madison, "which impartially secures to every man, whatever is his own." For the National Gazette, Property, (Mar. 29, 1792), reprinted in 14 Papers of James Madison 266 (R. Rutland et al. eds. 1983)."
Incredible how often these days I find myself in agreement with dissenting opinions. We are a banana republic on it's way to something even more frightening.
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/...
Regards,
O.A.
I do get a detailed explanation of where all of my property tax dollars go, and I'm separately charged for water, sewer, garbage, and emergency services. Variances for the separate charges are accompanied by an explanation of energy cost and other related impacting factors, so at least my metropolitan providers make an effort to help me understand what I'm paying for. If I don't like the way things are being handled, I can vote my city council representative out of office.
We didn't have public education when the nation was founded, so I can understand how the founders would find tax on property being charged for the educational system, even for property owners with no children a puzzling thing. The problem with accepting the idea of being part of a community is the new communal needs that are suddenly our individual responsibility, whether or not we personally agree with them.
It's hard to find a property owner that doesn't depend on some service provided by the community's government. You do have a right to challenge the government's charges for the support they claim they provide to your property, and some property owners have been successful (the now infamous Proposition 13 in California that still has the state legislature tearing its collective hair out).
My former classmate Tom DeWeese, a huge Rand fan, runs the American Policy Center and travels across the US showing people how to fight for property rights. See the website at:
www.Americanpolicy.org - years of research.
First it was taking control of US parks under the guise of UN Heritage Site designation, then it was 100 mile plus buffer zones around them, all personal property taken. More recently in Ohio, people trying to refinance, are subject to well inspection, by the EPA, which the examiner told a friend will soon be all over the US. Local agencies such as planning commissions and health depts. are being used by NGOs to limit and control personal property, until it becomes too difficult or too expensive to own.The goal is to move everyone into the cities into high rise apts, get rid of cars, and rewild rural areas. Farmers are under attack by new regulations all the time.
Remember, the UN has declared private property ownership as not sustainable and not in keeping with social fairness. The regulations will continue and grow, until government owns all property.
I was told by a zoning official that my rights on my property were what they told me they could be. That person was looking for a job the next week, only because I parked myself in front of the county government, in my wheelchair, until they let me build a ramp the first gal said I couldn't.
The problem they had was with my home and it's position on my property. I own a corner plot, 4.5 acres in size with my home located 175' feet back from the edge of one street and 230' feet from the edge of the other street. Since lot line setback requirements are 50' from a street and 15' from an adjoining lot, obliviously I had adequate room by hundreds of feet.
Where this "inspector" had the problem was that my ramp would, as required, a railing to keep me on the ramp. She decided that this constituted a "fence" and since there was a new ordinance that prohibited a "fence" from extending ANY distance from the "side" of the structure. And since my ramp was going to be entirely on what was considered the "side" of my home, and because she admitted that a ramp would be a dangerous thing without a "fence" to keep me on it, she denied my application. AFTER they accepted my non-refundable payment, of course.
On it's face, this was nonsense, since the confessed reason for the ordinance was to keep people from building fences that obscure visibility of traffic approaching a intersection. I met the common sense purpose of the ruling on it's face.
She did offer me one possible solution. I could, at my own expense, hire a lawyer to file for a "variance" from the ordinance, pay the $1000 fee, pay for delivery to each of my neighbors a letter outlining my proposed project, and to attend a public meeting where any of those neighbors could question me about my project at which the zoning board would decide if they would then allow me to build my ramp. When I asked her if she had any guess about how much this would all cost, she told me that most of the time it was $300-4000. But that she was certain it would be allowed. A standard building permit cost me $60 and the "special Fence permit was $6. I'd already paid this non-refundable fee. She also said that this would all require about two months, placing construction in Dec. which is no good in Illinois.
When I questioned why all this was necessary if she was "certain my request would be granted, she told me that this was purpose of the rules. It reminded me of Dr. Ferris saying that if nobody broke a law, they were no good at all.
All this took place at the end of the day. I was at the zoning board off ice the next day where I started pushing to solve this - without a lawyer.
It got solved.
.
I am glad it worked out for you. I too have been in a slightly similar situation. I needed to build a garage on my property and needed a variance. I live on a lake and the only possible location was between my house and the road. Who would build a garage between their house and lake and obscure their own lake view? I couldn't attach it to the house so they said since I couldn't put it behind my house they wanted $300 and a meeting for my neighbors to provide input. Funny, they call my lake frontage, frontage for tax purposes, but my road frontage, frontage for permit purposes! The $300 application was non refundable whether the variance was approved or not. One of my neighbors went to the meeting in the fall and complained they thought it might obscure road visibility though it was 50 feet from the road. He didn't bother to come and see me, my location stakes or sight plan, but showed up at the meeting and caused me another 45 day delay while the frost was threatening to increase my excavation costs...
Some people! I'm glad he moved out the next year...
Regards,
O.A.
When we had the ground cleared it was covered with Chinese elm and a few other garbage trees except for one old oak tree that was right in the middle of where the house was going to be built. So we had everything cleared, stumps pulled and starting setting out stakes so that the general contractor would be clear what we wanted.
I was sitting on a tractor I'd bought as my wife and son followed my direction for the stakes, when one neighbor came over, introduced himself and asked if I'd mind if his kids kept riding their 4 wheelers here. When I pointed out that this would most absurdly not be OK, he got all huffy and told me that he'd been planning to buy this property but I'd beaten him to it. The ground had been for sale for 5 years before I bought it.
He made one other appearance after the walls were going up to complain that MY home had caused his property taxes to go up, since I was building a bigger house than anyone else had built. I laughed and told him that he could double the size of his place and get even with me. He stormed off and has not been back since.
I sure was not going to put my little ramp addition up for his criticism.
.
Rand said it simply: 'Without property rights no
other rights are possible.' Isn't that what this
administration is working on; fundamentally transform America ?
Jan
Add to the mix a mortgage, under Federalized banking system and you are vaulted into a "Feudal " title system. This trap has been long in the making.
Article 1
Sec. 15. Lands allodial; void agricultural leases.
All lands within the state are allodial and feudal tenures of every description with all their incidents are prohibited. Leases and grants of agricultural lands for a longer period than 21 years reserving rent or service of any kind shall be void.
Next: Black's Law Dictionary 2nd edition offers these definitions:
Allodial — Free; not holden of any lord or superior; owned without obligation of vassalage or fealty; the opposite of feudal.
Allodium — Land held absolutely in one’s own right, and not of any lord or superior; land not subject to feudal duties or burdens. An estate held by absolute ownership, without recognizing any superior to whom any duty is due on account thereof.[7]
The above from this link. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allodial_ti...
As of July 7 2013 Juris Curiskis is still contending with MN over Allodial vs Feudal Rights. http://propertytaxjusticemn.blogspot.com...
Check out this type of info in your locale.
get it? squatter? never mind